nationfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Occupy Lovia Movement
I was wondering when this would arrive here, looks like the labour party voters are out on the street. Looks like its time for a counter rally. Considering that Lovia has been under socialist and progressive governments the past year then this is not down to conservative or capitalist ideas but down to the socialist and progressive ideas. I would also think that the real problem with train village is that there are no industrial corporations there so there are very few jobs to soak up the people with. Clearly capitalism, conservatism and investment are the answer. I will make the actual counter movement tonight, so be prepared. Kunarian 07:58, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :The above made me laugh, but there is some element of truth in it (I suppose). --Semyon 17:26, February 1, 2012 (UTC) ::Why did it make you laugh? surely I wasn't being that funny. :P Kunarian 17:30, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :::Well, it is quite funny that the Occupy movement is against the government, and the last government was left-liberal. :P --Semyon 17:47, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :::Clearly conservatism is not the answer. look at the fucked up mess in Canada, Steven Harper is an undemocratic dictator and they're messing up the economy, slashing jobs and support the Alberta oil sands/ pipeline. HORTON11: • 18:04, February 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::They aren't relavent, Lovian conservatives are completely different from this man. Plus look at the recent history of the UK, the Labour party didn't allow and even canceled elections very undemocratic. Comparing us to him is just as insulting as the fact that he calls himself a conservative. Kunarian 18:13, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :::::Well, Harper shows the true face of conservativism. And in the US, they're not better. Gingrich is a menace to the ecology in America, and even moderate Romney is blinded by corporate ambitions in office. Clearly a social-democratic government is the best solution.HORTON11: • 18:15, February 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::::Horton, do you expect me to turn around and go that UK new labour shows the true face of socialism? they declared illegal wars, spent us into the banks hands and sold off our industry to foreign nations? would you like to be associated with something that doesn't represent you? no i would think not. Plus you must forget that Obama passed the bills that allowed american citizens to be indefinately detained without trial and also allowed the CIA to assinate citizens who they thought were threats to the government. Now shall we get back to Lovian politics? they are of more relavence here. Kunarian 18:24, February 1, 2012 (UTC) Indeed, while I'm not a very hard-core conservative, claiming that any one individual 'shows the true face of conservativism' is about as ridiculous as saying that Stalin shows the true face of socialism. --Semyon 18:44, February 1, 2012 (UTC) Well, Stalin (and Mao, for that matter) sum up communists: killing people and ruling with an iron fist. HORTON11: • 18:47, February 1, 2012 (UTC) No, Yuri sums up communists: loving people, helping the poor, and taxing the rich. Stalin and Mao went crazy with power and deserve to be desecrated. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 23:10, April 19, 2012 (UTC) Debatable. --Semyon 11:24, April 20, 2012 (UTC) You know, instead of fighting with Occupy, you should be cooperating. They are useful at bringing light to the unjust corporate practices and grievances. The Liberate guys can do something about it at a corporate level, and Social could do something at a government level. A 3-pronged attack to bring forward a solution.HORTON11: • 18:45, February 1, 2012 (UTC)\ I really think this movement incorporates everything socalism. The last Lovian government was about 50% socialist, so no don't think it was all "left wing". This Labour party will be the one with the 99% which is everyone and propose a tax plan to tax the rich and keep the middle class thriving. Hopefully the CNP or the fake corporate backed conservative "Liberate" movement can see that there movement dosen't have any true meaning and really is just standing up for the old "Capitalist Fat Cats". Marcus/Michael Villanova 22:22, February 1, 2012 (UTC) : Villanova, Have you studied economics? do you know that the progressive taxation system doens't actually work and violates equality under law? The simple fact of the matter is that one you tax too much people avoid it. Study the laffer curve and maybe you'll get a basic idea. Kunarian 22:24, February 1, 2012 (UTC) ::: Study History! Look at all global troubles, really in the USA when there's low taxation, low regulation, and alot of loopholes a depression happens (1920's and 2000's) bad job you conservatives. Marcus/Michael Villanova 22:29, February 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::For the record, there wasn't a depression in the 1950s. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:35, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :::::@ Villanova: I think you will find that the 1920's and 2000's problems were actually due to too much borrowing from the banks, something socialist parties advocate, borrowing more than you have in hope of being able to pay it off. The banks gave way and the people with debt fell into the hole. So while in america the problems may have happened under Conservatives in Britain they happened under Socialists. In other words it wasn't due to deregulation or low taxation. Kunarian 22:39, February 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::::Not really. Simply what happened was too many people sold from the stock market, in the 1929 that is, making other people lose confidence and withdraw all their money from the bank to save it. The banks couldn't repay or pay or make loans, causing them to go bankrupt. People lost their life's savings, etc. In the 2000s, Republicans were in control when it happened, so... yeah. Also: Forum:First Chamber. We have a new Congress, don't we? —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:42, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :::::::Thats what I said, too much borrowing from the banks. and then I said the banks gave way. The problem is that Villanova is comparing all the conservative parties with the Republican party. Kunarian 22:45, February 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::Not the bank's fault the stock market collapsed. That is an effect, not a cause. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:47, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::If the stock market collapsed and the banks had not been lending huge amounts of money then it would not have happened. Kunarian 22:50, February 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::::How do you know that? You know what, nevermind. Please just post in the First Chamber. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:56, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::::Sorry I skipped a few words I should have written "then it was not have happened as badly" Kunarian 22:57, February 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::::::Makes me laugh at what you pass for "economics" really. if those people had to borrow from the banks it implies that they were poor. Let's guess why. Laid off from there job beacuse of budget cuts, house mortgage too high, new job not paying enough in the private sector. Honestly there was a reason borrowing rose. Capitalism. Marcus/Michael Villanova 23:05, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::::::Sorry but when do private industries lay people off because the government cuts? And plus your high taxes create the poor people by taxing too much. The low taxes generate prosperity. Your trying to relate the fact that people borrow money to fill investments to conservative and capitalistic ideas. So when rich people borrow money to fund a business they are poor? Villanova please improve your argumental skills. Kunarian 23:10, February 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::::::::Kunarian, in the Nordics countries there taxes are a lot, but there are very little poors. We should try to do that system for Lovia and help the people who need it. Granero 23:15, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::::::::Not quite as simple as that, there are very few poor people because the government subsidises them, basically giving them the money they paid into the tax system. My argument is: why not let them keep their money in the first place? Kunarian 23:18, February 1, 2012 (UTC) ::::::::::::::No i didn't say that. I said that was the economy the Conservatives put up! You are Horrible at arguing, half your sentences don't make sense, then you say "oh i meant that", please stop. Progressive taxes, good regulation, low capital gains and corporate tax and a well funded public sector is the perfect economy. Marcus/Michael Villanova 23:19, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :::::::::::::::I'm kinda fed up arguing for a party you decided to associate with me because you felt like it Villanova. If you can't understand what I'm typing then thats your problem not mine. "Progressive taxes, good regulation, low capital gains and corporate tax and a well funded public sector is the perfect economy" I wonder Villanova are you finished with spouting stupidity based on your ideological basis? or just going to continue saying that your ideas are the best? Kunarian 23:25, February 1, 2012 (UTC) OK! now here is one of the many thought reasons for the crash, and it is the one "that I believe is the main cause of the crash, it comes from a credible source: {C}{C}{C A lot of the Stock Market crash can be blamed on over exuberance and false expectations. In the years leading up to 1929, the stock market offered the potential for making huge gains in wealth. It was the new gold rush. People bought shares with the expectations of making more money. As share prices rose, people started to borrow money to invest in the stock market. The market got caught up in a speculative bubble. – Shares kept rising and people felt they would continue to do so. The problem was that stock prices became divorced from the real potential earnings of the share prices. Prices were not being driven by economic fundamentals but the optimism / exuberance of investors. This was not the first investment bubble, nor was it the last. Most recently we saw a similar phenomena in the dot com bubble. Here, the effects were much less because it was confined to a small sector of the stock market. {C}{C}{C The weakness of capitalism is people’s irrationality. i.e. people stopped judging shares on economic potential, but, got caught up in a speculative bubble. {C}{C}{C Therefore, in October 1929, Shares were grossly overvalued. When some companies posted disappointing results, some investors started to feel this would be a good time to cash in on their profits. This initial selling caused a fall in prices; this change in market sentiment soon spread as other investors started to panic and follow suit. Before long the market was falling very rapidly. The bull market had been replaced by a bear market." Kunarian 23:21, February 1, 2012 (UTC) I'll stop saying my ideas are right when you prove them wrong. Your ideas make no sense! With Little taxation, no regulation and no other form of taxation. Which equals no government safety net for the poor and middle class and allows the Wall street people to go rampant. So in case if the private sector collapses, like in 1929 for any reason, there is no saftey net for the poor and old. How about you actually make a point with out you saying "Go study economics" or "Do you even understand" beacuse yes I do. Marcus/Michael Villanova 23:34, February 1, 2012 (UTC) : I'm sorry but I'll prove your ideas wrong when you give even a smidge of proof that they are right. Thing is with little taxation people have more money, now I know thats horrible for you but stay with me. And then you say that there are no other forms of taxation, where did I say that? clearly your making things up again Marcus. and then you say that theres no government safety net, how so? how does little taxation equal no welfare? it doesn't. and how does little taxation suddenly turn rational money making businessmen into blood thirsty money stealers? it doesn't. And the private sector didn't collapse in 1929, the stock market did and without investors the private sector companies that relied on them fell apart while the self sustaining ones prospered. Marcus, once again you've said a lot but given no proof. And now I have to be off, be seeing you. Kunarian 23:42, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :: I have but if you don't want to see go. Dude it's human nature, when there is no regulation, no taxation on you income, you'll take the moment and start taking risks Like in the 2000's which you can't make up for. Look at the housing bubble. Corporations with NO regulation, do what they damn well please, giving stupid loans and puting like 20% interest on them. With no taxation or revenue there is no safety net, and nothign for the 99% to lean back on. I hope you just don't keep saying "NO PROOF WHERE IS THE PROOF!" I hope you read things over and keep seeing the proof. Marcus/Michael Villanova 00:04, February 2, 2012 (UTC) ::: Its not human nature. Plus when did I say no regulation, you seem to be very confused about my policies. With little taxation and a safety net it is unlikely anyone will need anything to fall back on because they will actually have money. ::: Flat tax simply preserves eqaulity under law while not waging ignorant class warfare. Kunarian 01:29, February 2, 2012 (UTC) :: Why are they protesting JUST NOW? I support some-what progressive taxation for careing for the poor and sick. But just after elections when we had a uber-left government just a few days ago? I think this is an all out cry from Labour for attention. -Sunkist- 01:05, February 2, 2012 (UTC) ::: My thoughts exactly. Kunarian 01:29, February 2, 2012 (UTC) ::::May I point out, as a relatively neutral person who doesn't really have firmly defined fiscal views, that neither of you would be able to convince me of your viewpoint? You both refuse to agree on any common ground, which makes the entire debate a waste of time, and most of your arguments consist of ad hominem. --Semyon 17:40, February 2, 2012 (UTC) Why Train Village? Now when you look at the population then look at the industries and jobs provided in each settlement in Lovia the settlement that comes off worst is Charleston not Train Village, in fact train village is in fine working order. Kunarian 22:59, February 1, 2012 (UTC) Train Village was actually destroyed, by Oslobodenia, right? And Train Village has too few people per job. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 23:01, February 1, 2012 (UTC) : When was it destroyed? I need a link. And if it wasn't destroyed then it has all the jobs it needs. The stadium alone would need from 50 to 100 people to run. Kunarian 23:03, February 1, 2012 (UTC) : It's really dropped off, it use to be really really vibrant now alot of things have left and overall even the mining industry took a major hit which, are major employers in the Train Village and Oceana area. Marcus/Michael Villanova 23:04, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :: Right, is that the problem? people left and mining industry laid peeps off? Kunarian 23:07, February 1, 2012 (UTC) :::Not to mention the napalm bombs that Oslobodenia dropped on it... yeah. This would be a very interesting thing to write about. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 23:09, February 1, 2012 (UTC) Poll Poll Polling from now on will be based on reality. :P --Semyon 21:39, February 2, 2012 (UTC) Do you support the Occupy movement? Yes No Not sure/Don't know Do you support the Liberate movement? Yes No Not sure/Don't know Voted no to both. I think this is drawing people's activity away from Congress and is also rather silly. Lovia is described as a very high quality of life country. Also, someone voted in only one poll--weird. Liberate has 4 votes and Occupy has 5. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:19, February 2, 2012 (UTC) : Probably meant that someone wanted to either just support or vote against Liberate. By the way we can't do anything in congress until the government is confirmed, but when it is I have quite a few ideas to throw in there. Kunarian 22:24, February 2, 2012 (UTC) :: Why did you change the "Occupy has 5" that I just fixed back to "Occupy has 3"??? —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:29, February 2, 2012 (UTC) ::: Editing time difference, while you were fixing it I was probably typing, simple wikia error not telling me there was an edit inbetween. Kunarian 22:35, February 2, 2012 (UTC) ::::Odd, normally it'll warn of an edit conflict. And Congress can do things, just not the executive branch. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:36, February 2, 2012 (UTC) ::::::I think both movements can agree on this "WHY IS CONGRESS SO DISTRACTED AT EVERYTHING!!!" dude seriously if we actually were real we'd be slower than the americans. Marcus/Michael Villanova 22:41, February 2, 2012 (UTC) Police Brutality???!!! What is this you've thrown in? Police Brutality? this isn't America where the police are gun toting madmen half the time and plus considering that the police are under my command being the minister of defense I haven't ordered any crackdown and so niether has anyone below me. Please remove it, it doesn't belong here and would not have happened. Kunarian 07:04, April 19, 2012 (UTC) :America has amazing cops and great civilian viglantes such as the great and honourable George Zimmerman. Viva Zapata! Enough While in the rest of the world Occupy is - thank God - finally ended, we in Lovia are still doing nothing and occupying some random places. Time to make it stop I'd say. I want the Oceana State free from active Occupyers by the end of the month. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 08:21, April 19, 2012 (UTC) Tapered off the later numbers. Hurbanova is now done, Newhaven will be done next count. Noble City will be done in May. Also, the poll numbers are too high. The poll shows 33% approval, not the 75% it says, so tapered that off too. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 10:54, April 19, 2012 (UTC) Violently attack and prosecute them and start a war! Fire and death! Actually yes, why is the approval rating so high? its only 36% in the poll for the movement. Kunarian 21:44, April 19, 2012 (UTC) Had to undo Marcus. Occupy needs to end, there's no point in continuing it: most people do not support it, and it's pretty much gone in other parts of the world. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 23:10, April 19, 2012 (UTC) To quote the wise Mr. Breyev, 'polling will now be based on reality.' :P --Semyon 06:28, April 20, 2012 (UTC) So fix it... —TimeMaster (talk • ) 10:55, April 20, 2012 (UTC) I will, but I feel kind of bad doing so on Marcus' page. --Semyon 11:21, April 20, 2012 (UTC) :Maybe I'll do it, I'm good at that sort of thing. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 13:25, April 20, 2012 (UTC) Why does the disapproval begin to lessen? --OuWTBsjrief-mich 12:59, April 20, 2012 (UTC) Well, naturally there's some fluctuation, which you always get with polls, because people are fickle and change their minds. But overall, the trend is towards greater disapproval. As it is elsewhere in the world, incidentally. --Semyon 13:28, April 20, 2012 (UTC)